Why the public sector needs more outsourcing

It drew this comment from "Bitter and Twisted", our regular and much valued reader / cynic.

“Peter, you describe all sorts of problems with public sector outsourcing, yet still cling to the ideology that Outsourcing Is Good?”

Well, that is a very good point! I suppose in the context of public or private sector outsourcing, I am what you might call a sceptical supporter. It seems very clear that "outsourcing" in its broadest sense is essential for pretty much every organisation these days - the world is too complex for anything else. Even a small organisation such as Spend Matters has some technical support, some help with our mailing lists and newsletter, an accountant.. and so on.

But I acknowledge that too often outsourcing has been executed by people and organisations who didn't really know what they were doing, placing business in the hands of organisations more concerned with growing profit than giving great service. Done properly, however, it must be an important business tool. And if you need persuading that the Government could do with some further external expertise, consider this.

One of the central Government "flagship" shared back-office service centres, run by civil servants, has accounts payable as one of its key service lines, but can only accept invoices by post. And I mean “only” – not as an option, but as the only possible route. They can’t accept a Word document or pdf by email, let alone e-invoicing.

Produce the document, print it out, hard copy, put it in an envelope, find the address, find a stamp (I know they’re in the drawer somewhere…), walk to the post-box, then wait for payment, hoping that the invoice did actually arrive at the other end of the country.

And that's just one reason why there is still significant scope for Whitehall to make more use of outsourcing.

Voices (7)

Huhh?:
05.01.2012 at 9:21 am

Unfortunately I’ve never seen outsourcing to a totally external company EVER deliver benefits, except for the outsourcing organisations! All that ends up is poor service, lack of staff morale and the huge headache and mess of reintegrating a smashed function back into your organisation. As an aside – -I suspect there’s money in a training course around “What next when your outsourcing explodes in your face…”

The only time it works is when all parties have nuts in the vice and payment is contigent upon success. Contracts let on a sensible risk/reward profit % for all parties…

As government specialises in have a framework of the vultures they’re always going to be ripped on any outsourcing deals.

I mean where’e the IBM dude when you need him to pop up and defend big blue’s track record in the face of any financial facts…

“I’ve never seen outsourcing…EVER deliver benefits” but “the only time it works is when…” – leaving aside the contradiction in the two statements here, I think you’ve just answered the question.

As most of the readers here should be switched on to the benefits of good procurement it is surely self-evident that high quality outsourcing can and will deliver benefits to any organisation whether public or private sector. The problem is that so many outsourcing exercises are undertaken with a poor understanding of objectives, the scope of requirements and the true internal costs (and value/benefits), are driven by short-term goals and with little consideration as to how they will be managed on a long-term basis.

As you rightly say, where the service provider has a real commercial interest in the long-term success of the initiative, the outsourcing organisation creates an effective structure for managing the delivery of service (including management by output rather than just “lifting and shifting” the in-company team, processes and practices) and the parties are not just interested in headline cost reductions in the first 12 months then you’re likely to deliver.

Unfortunately, whether in the public or private sector, headline-grabbing management seeking a quick fix are often the main driving force, giving rise to the horrendous statistics on how many outsourcing activities fail.

Working for an outsourcer myself I know which of my clients get more value out of me and they’re not the ones just looking for 25% savings in the first year.

As I am not part of the sales or PR team in my company, I post on this forum in a personal capacity.

However, I’m not sure if there is any way Peter or SpendMatters can put us in touch with one another directly but if so I’d be very happy to give examples of beneficial outsourcing deliverables – both where I’ve been part of the delivery team and where I have been the procurement manager handling the outsourced activity. I’d also be honest enough to share some war stories where it’s not gone well and why, in my opinion.

Effective management is indeed something my organisation advocates and often “educating the client” is a key component of our long-term contracts. We have also walked away from deals where we don’t believe we’re adding significant value.

Peter – You didn’t exactly rise to the challenge I posed on your origimal posting around Local Government and outsourced “back office” in so called partnerships and joint ventures like: Liverpool, Suffolk & here in Somerset (through a 75% owned IBM company called South West One).

To recap:

It was reported in November 2011, 4 years into the contract, that cashable savings (of the IBM/SW1-stated £192m target) are just £7.6m! Yet IBM/SW1 operate “category-based” procurement using their own implementation of SAP?? SW1 were even awarded a prize for their procurement plans (before a penny was saved)! Was that CIPS?

Add to the £50m charged by IBM (through SW1) for “transformation”: £4m to let the contract and form SW1, £3m for interest on the £30m loan and £5m to staff the contract management team (over 10 years) then you have the equation that:

Following massive “front loaded” 28% cuts in Somerset in 2010/11, the elderly and other vulnerable adults are now only given care if their needs are “substantial” (formerly intervention was for “moderate” needs – expect NHS beds to start blocking); Libraries (illegally) closed; youth services decimated; rural bus services cut right back etc.

Those so called “assured” back office & procurement savings were really necessary for real frontline services to real people. Very real impacts.

I am in favour of accessing external expertise, but would usually prefer an in-sourcing route to maintain control and ensure skills transfer etc.

We seem to have lost sight of “investing in people” and then fall prey to the aswer being to outsource or contract in all expertise.

Many of these skills are strategic. They need to be invested in people whose loyalties and aims are yours!

Associate Sponsors

Procurement Research

Spend Matters research is based on a year-long editorial calendar, exploring bigger picture areas and issues.

New! Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Your Spend Data (But Were Afraid To Ask)In this briefing paper we take a look at how spend analytics, and smart and creative use of the source data, can help organisations answer some of those tricky, complex, or even embarrassing questions relating to procurement expenditure. We look at questions such as: How do I get to the bottom of tail spend? and How much corruption really goes on my organisation?

New! Geo-political Risk - An Informed Global View Is Essential The fifth of our short papers outlining key supply chain risk areas looks at geo-political risks, which include war and revolution as well as labour disputes and the like. Clearly, this sort of risk event can be amongst the most serious in terms of implications for buyers.

New! "Man-Made" Risk - Different Risks Require Thoughtful StrategiesThis is the fourth of our short papers outlining key supply chain risk areas. This examines "man-made" risks, a broad category that ranges from fires and explosions to strikes and labour disputes. All can have a serious impact for customers of the firms affected, so effective risk management is vital.

New! Natural Disasters – How to Mitigate Unavoidable RisksThis is the third in a series of short papers outlining the supply chain risks that can have the most devastating effects on your business. This paper examines the risk to suppliers (and ultimately the buyer) of a natural disaster - a risk type that is mostly unavoidable but one against which you can mitigate.

New! Supply Chain Risk – Getting To Grips With n-Tier VisibilityIn this briefing paper, we look at supply chain risk, and in particular the risks that emerge from beyond the first-tier (the direct suppliers to our organisation). We include ideas on how to gain greater visibility of the whole supply chain or network, and what to do once we have it.

New! The Merger – A Procurement StoryA short novel in four chapters. It follows and scripts the daily lives of two CPOs whose businesses have been recently merged: the one, a fully tech-savvy, source-to-pay function, the other, relying on personal expertise and hands-on manual processes. We learn of their opposing challenges and how they resolve them -- together.

Improve Your Procurement Negotiation SkillsThe work of behavioural psychologist and Nobel Prize winner Dr Daniel Kahneman suggests some winning techniques. How to use priming, attitudes to risk and anchoring to your advantage in negotiations!

Full Value Buying: Moving Beyond Price NegotiationWe look at range of procurement mechanisms that can drive better value, and then consider two aspects in more detail - demand management and specification - which can drive far greater benefits than a pure price focus!